Supermarkets in Shetland - prices, ethics and experiences

[ISOT]

According to Mr Greenhill(SIC) tonight on radio Shetland, the reason they are not in breach is because the local planners took it on face value that Tesco's would keep to their word that they needed their extension to increase their selection of food stuffs and not for non-consumable goods.

 

That seems to not be the case and the 10% restriction on non-consumable goods that this premises had before became nil and void when Tesco presented their extension plans to the planning department.

 

Thats how I interpreted what he was saying but I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Cheers

[lerwick]

Its good enough for the ltca after the way they treated Chris Hodge.

[paulb]

who cares. its a better shop now. maybe they should spend there time working out how to cope and plan there future instead of trying to fight tesco at planning rules which they will lose. tescos really don't lose these type of fights.

[lerwick]

I hope Tesco shop is supported well as it is a superb facility. I would never have thought the likes of it would have come to Shetland, its like an Aberdeen shop in Lerwick . It will certainly help keep people shopping in Shetland, Thank you Tesco.

[breeksy]

I hope Tesco shop is supported well as it is a superb facility. I would never have thought the likes of it would have come to Shetland, its like an Aberdeen shop in Lerwick . It will certainly help keep people shopping in Shetland, Thank you Tesco.

 

I am amazed by this kind of reaction that people *not just you) have had to this extension.

 

When I was in (a good few days after it had opened), half the food shelves were empty and the range of foodstuffs had not improved at all (which hopefully will be remedied soon if it hasn't been already - it certainly would need to be). As for the rest, it wasn't anything that I can't get elsewhere at similar prices.

 

It was quite disappointing to be honest.

[Guest posiedon]

Vic thomas has it right in this letter to the Shet;land news.

Despite an avid loathing for Tesco for their dodgy trading practices, the bullying and ruin it causes the farming community and destruction of small local business communities, I have some sympathy with all the folk that say that the street has brought a lot of its woes on itself.

 

Today I purchased a button battery on the street which cost £4. Later at home I checked this out on the internet and found the average retail price was 47-50 pence each, either individual or in packs of 10.

 

I don't mind going out of my way to support local products and suppliers and I don't mind paying more for the local option as it’s there when I need it, but regrettably with a few exceptions, the norm seems to be take it or leave it and prices that don't just encourage folk to go elsewhere but actually force it.

 

Chris Hodge tried to bring mainland prices and big ranges of goods to Shetland and seems to have been very popular, but was treated rather badly and pushed out of the ring.

 

Tesco are in an altogether different league and will push Shetland around to suit their needs. Unless they don't sell enough or achieve the corporate target they will be here for the duration, what they will do though is run the store at a loss long enough to crush enough competition to gain the dominant retailing position.

 

The only businesses that will survive will be those that trade in things Tesco don't trade in - so if folk in Shetland want any competition at all you must also continue to shop at the Co-op.

 

If they shrink or go under Tesco will kill its range, sell you what it wants you to buy and hike up prices. There are many communities around the country that welcomed Tesco with open arms at first for all the reasons folk in Shetland are putting forward, but who now regret it. There is a growing number of communities trying to stop Tesco’s cancerous growth and mysterious control over the planning system.

 

Failure to see the big picture and focus only on who has the cheapest item on the shelf today, no matter how this is achieved, could lead to the Easter Island phenomenon.

 

Equally a trader that sells an item seven times over the price it is widely available elsewhere is handing their customers over to Tesco and doesn't deserve to be in business anyway.

 

Vic Thomas

vic.thomas@btopenworld.com

 

Tesco are a fecking abomination and you will regret letting them get a foothold here.

[peeriebryan]

According to Mr Greenhill(SIC) tonight on radio Shetland, the reason they are not in breach is because the local planners took it on face value that Tesco's would keep to their word that they needed their extension to increase their selection of food stuffs and not for non-consumable goods.

 

That seems to not be the case and the 10% restriction on non-consumable goods that this premises had before became nil and void when Tesco presented their extension plans to the planning department.

 

Thats how I interpreted what he was saying but I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Cheers

 

That certainly seems to be the situation

 

The planning documents are available here - http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/default.asp?filter=2008_245_PCD - Tesco's "Retail Impact Assessment" states that through building the extension they won't be in competition with anyone apart from the Co-op supermarket, and they won't be increasing stock of "non food" items. Despite their assurances, they have clearly not stuck by their word, and local planners apparently have no way to make them comply

 

Examples include:

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2008_245_PCD/2008_245_PCD_Scan_004_Retail_Impact_Assessment_Part_2_SUPERSEDED.pdf

 

* 2.4 "It is important to state at the outset that the increase in sales floorspace will be for the sale of convenience goods only"

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2008_245_PCD/2008_245_PCD_Scan_004_Retail_Impact_Assessment_Part_5_SUPERSEDED.pdf (note that the first and last pages are mixed up)

 

* 5.25 "...the modest proposed extension of 868sqm net retail area will not raise any issues of retail impact upon the town centre....Additional diversion will result from the extension, but as the only other main food superstore in Shetland, the Coop will retain a competitive market share."

 

* 5.6 "The assessment concludes that there will not be any significant impact on the town centre of Lerwick or any rural shops. The criteria is therefore satisfied", the criteria being "that the vitality and viability of existing centres and rural shops will not be prejudiced"

 

* 5.7 "In terms of criteria, an existing condition relating to previous planning consents at the store is already in place which deals with the issue. In any case, it is not the intention of the proposal to seek to increase the amount of non-food shopping floorspace. Therefore, no legal agreement is required in this case" - the criteria being that "the applicant signs a planning agreement limiting the amount of non-food shopping floorspace"

[lerwick]

What we need is Tesco to come with fuel pumps next.

[ISOT]

Thanks peeriebryan I didn't know how to find any of that but I have seen it on paper.

 

I agree that some of the shops in town need to 'buck up' but letting these people do what they want (and it is in black and white) seems ridiculous to me. They have lied to SIC officials and the general public and its almost laughable that Mr Greenhill seemed to think that planners had taken Tescos application on 'face value'!! How does that work?

 

I don't believe that Commercial Street will wither away and die but there seems to be a blatant disregard for the rules here and it seems that there's nothing that the Council can do now to stop it....maybe they don't want!

 

I wonder if I could stick a 3 storey house on the end of Twageos and get away with it!

 

 

Cheers

[peeriebryan]

... there seems to be a blatant disregard for the rules here and it seems that there's nothing that the Council can do now to stop it....

Pandora's Box is open for business!

[Ghostrider]

I don't usually have any noticable sympathy for the pleepsin of LTCA members, but unless I'm missing something here, it seems to me that once again things are where they are due to Planning Dept. incompetence crossed with Councillors' incompetence/naivety.

 

What did anyone expect when apparently the only definition of what the extension could be used for was something as vague as "convenience goods". Give a definition like that to any business person, not just the Tesco board, and they'd have a field day.

 

If the Planning Dept. didn't have the sense to produce a hard a fast list of what constituted "convenience goods" according to their own definition of the term, some Councillor might have had the sense to move that one was provided before the application was considered.

 

Of course, the LTCA had plenty of time to examine the planning documents too, and if they really were concerned about their futures, raise the matter themselves. But, apparently they weren't that bothered about it to be so diligent.

[Spinner72]

It think thats hit the nail squarely on the head Ghostrider.

 

Even to the untrained eye, that definition, or rather the lack thereof, is what the LTCA should have pounced on immediately and asked for a detailed description of what it meant.

 

Maybe more time reading and less time pleepsing would have seen them (LTCA) in better stead. Sorry for going OT, but whilst wandering up Mounthooly St (past the lounge, which I admit I dont do very often!) I couldnt help but notice what appeared to be an office fot the LTCA. Surely thats an overhead they could do without if they wanted to compete!

 

To get back to topic - was also in Tescos for a proper look round. Nice to see they are stocking outsize menswear (so i'll be buying more locally than online) and was happy to see a wide range of electrical goods from big brandnames at decent prices down to the whitebox tesco saver stuff for the minimal price you would expect.

 

We noticed a nice expansion in the range of foodstuffs too, but the new shelving still wasn't full so I would assume the lack of difference noted before was due to the ongoing changes?

 

The place was pinned, and the CooP clearly less so, so that would account for their normal stock of foodstuffs being unable to cope, but after a week or two when the novelty wears off things will settle down. I can't see the change altering may peoples "helly errands" habits in the long run, after all, you dont need new clothes/kettles/toys every week

[bug]

* 2.4 "It is important to state at the outset that the increase in sales floorspace will be for the sale of convenience goods only"

 

 

How convenient = http://www.altiusdirectory.com/Business/types-consumer-goods.html

[shetlander]

Both convenience and comparison goods are defined in the planning committee report. In any case, I don't think the issue is whether they were defined, but whether there should have been a condition and/or legal agreement restricting how much floorspace could have been dedicated for each. A legal interpretation would probably be required as to whether it still stands, but the report also states that prior to the extension application being granted, they were given approval to use up to 184sqm for comparison goods. In the (admittedly limited) number of times I have been in the place before now, I don't recall seeing much other than your normal supermarket offerings so could it be that they are only taking up that opportunity now?

 

If not, or if the 184sqm is being exceeded, I agree that the Planning Department were foolish to have taken Tesco's intentions on face value. In any case I reckon they would have been wise to impose an appropriate condition and/or get them to enter into a legal agreement for clarity and to avoid the stooshie that now looks likely to ensue.

[lerwick]

Should it not be the customers that dictate what is stocked by Tesco not the planning department? If they dont stock the goods you want to buy vote with your feet and dont go back. As for the letter from Vic Thomas it would be against the competition laws to reduce prices for the sole purpose of removing your competition and then increase prices. Case law Laker Airlines v British Airways. I agree big buisness needs to be reminded of the law now and again.